Munna Mishra @ Dilip Kumar Mishra @ Manoj Mishra v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13635 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2021 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj ====================================================== MUNNA MISHRA @ DILIP KUMAR MISHRA @ MANOJ MISHRA Son of Late Laxmi Kant Mishra Resident of Village-Panan Mahuawa, P.S.-Kateya, District-Gopalganj (Bihar).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shivendra Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 28-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with S. Tr. No. 657 of 2023 arising out of Kateya P.S. Case No. 177 of 2021 lodged under Sections 386, 387, 302 and 120(B)/34 of the I.P.C. read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, FIR has been lodged against six named accused persons including the present petitioner. In the FIR the informant has disclosed that he has heard gun shot from 50 metre from the place of occurrence and when he turned he seen the present petitioner having AK-47 in his hand who fled away on motorcycle. Immediately the informant reached at the place of occurrence and found his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13635 of 2024(6) dt.28-08-2024 2/2 brother died.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that allegation of demand of ransom is against Alkeshwer Mishra. There is nothing against this petitioner. There is no eye-witness to the occurrence. The petitioner has antecedent of 20 cases which has been mentioned in para 3 of the bail application. He submits that the petitioner is in custody since 30.07.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail who submits that from the contents of the FIR it would crystal clear that it is the petitioner who has committed the said occurrence because the chain of story link the petitioner with the occurrence.

6. In the facts and circumstances, the Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Hence the bail application is rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Prakash/- U